Only 1 simultaneous game in Live Chess now? Are you kidding me??

Using a free account you can only play 1 game now? When did this change? I used to be able to play at least 3 games a month ago.

I'm finding a new site if this doesn't change soon. It's ridicilous.

Unfortunately multi-games was being abused badly as players would simply leave a game in progress and start a new one just to irritate their opponent. There isn't much we can do to prevent it, though paying members are subject to having their accounts closed for abusing this. But for free members, the bad ones just don't care, and it is one of our top complaints.

Every day lots of "Hey, I was winning a game and my opponent just stopped moving with 10 minutes left to go in the game. So then I follow him and find out he just started a new game!!!" 

I'm sorry that the actions of a bunch of bad-behavors ruins it for others. 

How about using some kind of a behavior system? If a player gets a few thumbs down he goes to only being able to play 1 game. You shouldn't punish the rest of us for a few bad apples. Also, the other player can start a new game as well if it seems the other player doesn't respond.

Also, I'm not sure if this fixes the problem or rather makes it worse. Before when I encountered these types of players I would just start a new game as well. Now I just have to sit and take it?

Hey Sir_Connery,

You make a good point. We also like this idea of a "self-moderating" behavior system by the members, though it's also not going to be easily implemented. What if members begin "thumbs downing" other members for kicks? There will need to be an automatic system of checks and balances... 

The only thing I'd ask you to consider while we try to figure this out (and we will try to find the best solution) is that it's not bad behavior "by a few" that the "majority" is now getting punished for. Unfortunately, it's proven to be bad behavior by a large majority of members, and the complaints are many and often.

It's not a "premium vs basic" member issue! We love all our members  -- BUT you have to appreciate our point: If you now encounter a premium member who is abusing in this way, he can be reported, and when he gets caught and eventually banned for this abuse, he is losing money.

It *does* make a difference. Starting a new game, because others are doing the same to you is kind of "two wrongs don't make a right". We may find a better way to moderate this and allow basic members this feature back, but it's going to take some time, and the level of abuse that was happening was simply too much to ignore. 

Thanks for your feedback here. We don't want you to go anywhere...

Danny

An old site called Newgrounds has a user-based moderating system similar to what was mentioned above:

1. A video is uploaded to the site
2. It is reviewed by the community
3. It is then given a rating and above a certain rating is allowed onto the site - this is very loose as even bad ratings will allow a video to go through up to a point
4. If the video violates the terms and conditions the site's moderators have set, then users tend to "blam" the video downgrading it's chance of getting on the site significantly
5. If all else fails, there is the "Blow the Whistle" options which gives users direct control to give reason why the video should not be present. The video is then set for review my more authorized persons. If a user blows the whistle and the video is legit without anything unauthorized (of any kind) the user's whistle status goes down with "broken" being the lowest. If they blow it and the video(s) must be removed, their status goes up. This can change with each good and bad whistle blow.

Something similar could be implemented here with users having the understanding that if they "blow the whistle" for bad or incorrect reasons too many times that they will no longer have any choice in the matter. This will also cut the amount of minor work done by staff and, once implemented and understood, will make the staff's job primarily review and restriction rather than constant micro-managing.

Just a thought ^_^

Note: This system will not work right away. It will take time to weed out the trouble-makers. But once that happens, the community should help take care of itself.

if you feel this strongly why not just upgrade? it's quite cheap for only a gold membership and you're supporting this great site!

I can't play regularly. I play a few days every month or two. But those days that I do play, I play non stop. And given the situation now I can't do that.

So, no simuls for normal members? 

Unless you are a titled player giving a simul, there is no good reason you would ever have to be playing more than game of chess at once.  I don't see what the big deal is?  If you want to get out of a game, offer an abort or resign.  I'm assuming you're allowed to abort games on move 1 without your opponent's permission.  (never tried here)  If you're concerned about your opponent sitting without moving and holding you hostage, just deal with it.  Inevitable hazard of internet chess.  Wait, collect your points, and add him to your noplay list.

And just like NG this system would give rise to 'clans' that thumb up each other and thumb down members of rival clans.

That would be difficult in this case as a person must accept a challenge. You can't just go to their profile and hit a thumbs down button. All of this can be easily moderated. The Fulps just don't enforce these rules too strictly and let the community do its thing.

How about you play one game at a time and try to get better?

BOOM

However, it is their choice.

Yeah... Wait, so why do the premium members have it again if you only need 1 game?

Because they pay the website and deserve things you, as a free member, do not. If it wasnt for them paying you would not be able to play at all. Be grateful

This is part of it only. However, we can have our "freedom" taken away if we start abusing the multiple game system.

"If you now encounter a premium member who is abusing in this way, he can be reported, and when he gets caught and eventually banned for this abuse, he is losing money." IM ACEChess STAFF

Terms and Service, the very conditions that govern everybody on this site, are there not to be ignored by any player. However, there are a LOT of players and a handful of staff in comparison. It takes time to investigate and ban the people whose names are submitted and I suspect there are plenty of players who are banned that none of us even know about.

Riiight. When other sites offer it for free (which was the case here as well) I'm thinking of moving to play there. Which was the whole point of this thread. Does this site really want to alienate a lot of possible to be paying members because of this? Or should something else be done instead?

When you say "other sites" which sites are you thinking about? Yahoo?

The major ICSs (FICS, ICC, etc) don't allow simultaneous games except in the case of simuls (and even then you can only move on the board you are supposed to).  It runs against their architecture.

Why not some kind of AI? For example: You first have to play a few games. Chess.com recieves your average time per time control in certain part of the game. If you go 1 minute above your average more than twice a day you get a warning. (If you don't find this right contact support.) One more and your BOOM! OUT!

I do not see the point of playing multiple games... especially at our level.